No-Till Guru (Dwayne Beck) 55:34min presentation at the 2019 National No-Till Conference is a great audio/video on making new agriculture practices profitable. I brought this up from a December 2020 post. Everything said in this presentation is current today, June, 2023, and more meaningful for some of us who are trying to follow the principles for successfully regenerating our soils and maintaining yields. The first ~ 18 minutes are about South Dakota, and the Pierre Research Farm.
No-Till Guru (Dwayne Beck) 2017 presentation talks about Cover Crops and factors to consider when raising them like purpose, and cultivar selection. Some repeated information in different words. If I would have found this earlier, I would probably have done better, and be farther along with cover cropping.
A recent posting in "Weeders of the West" a WSU blog [https://smallgrains.wsu.edu/weeders-of-the-west/2021/06/21/occasional-tillage-and-herbicide-resistance/ ] stirred me to make this posting. The link above will take you to their posting that I am referencing. For about 5 years I have been hearing WSU weed scientists introduce "occasional tillage" back as a practice to reduce herbicide resistance. For those of us that are die-hard no-tillers, that's like throwing gasoline on a fire, --it makes no sense what-so-ever.
I could rant on this all day, but I will try and limit my comments to a few references in the posting.I’ll start with a statement of my position.I’m not quite as old as dirt but I was around before there were synthetic chemistry or fertilizers for our crops.I have spent most of my life stirring dirt, destroying my little portion of the Palouse ecosystem.For the last 30 years I have been trying to figure out how to repair that damage.Since the year 2000, research on soil health has grown astronomically. It's to the point where I discount (not reject) research findings that are more than 5 years old.
--What is soil health?I find that it has many different parameters depending on who is speaking on the subject.I can accept Huberto Blanco-Canqui’s findings for the high quality, deep soils that probably make up their research sites.If the soil is deep, with high OM, and a near neutral pH, then, an occasional stirring probably is a minor setback to the ecosystem.Soils with a high level of biological life have the capacity to rapidly rebuild after a destructive event.Soils with low levels of biological life do not have that capacity, so rebuilding is slow. The post mentions tillage to break up compaction and reduce stratification of soils. Back in the 70's, WSU was researching ways to mitigate tillage compaction.Compaction was recognized as a problem through the use of moldboard plows, disc harrows, and rod weeders. I had fields where four tillage pans could be identified. Chisle plows and heavy cultivators were proposed solutions. Compaction layers were found to be moving lower in the soil profile because chisels and cultivators broke soil aggregates into finer particles that moved deeper into the profile. Deep chiseling and subsoiling was considered, but rejected because it was feared that compaction layers would move lower than implements could reach. We are still dealing with compaction layers in our soils. It has been demonstrated that we can influence compaction and stratification of our soils with plants and biology. We need to figure out how to incorporate them as part of our cropping practice. There are plants and macro fauna that are very good at these tasks and leave a better long term effect.Except for small acreages, soils in the Palouse, in general, are badly degraded from erosion from years of cultivation (erosion from cultivation, water, and wind), and from being mostly a monoculture cropping system. Any cultivation is a major setback to our ecosystem.I compare "occasional tillage" to burning your house down every few years.Many of the soil biological structures don’t rebuild very quickly in our climate and cultural environment.Tillage and fallow is a real downer for soil microbe communities.Biological networks are sliced, diced, burned, starved, --and are slow to recover from a major disruption.
--What is “occasional cultivation”? I have never heard a followup explanation as to what this term meant, or how it would extend a herbicides useful life. Retracing my memory of tillage I don't think there is such a term as "occasional cultivation. Nearly every year I see a farmer do reduced tillage, and weed escapement is always a problem, which results in more tillage, or chemistry applied with less than desirable results. My experience is that tillage bury’s seed, of which some emerge and the remainder stay in the soil bank, safe, for later emergence. Tillage destroys OM and emits CO2 and H2O into the atmosphere. Tillage degrades the soil through erosion, compounding our problems. I find that, the less the disturbance, the fewer the weeds that compete with the crop. I regularly see this in my fields. A mat of surface residue along with no disturbance is preferable. I often wish my equipment could levitate over the fields leaving no track. Wheel tracks are where the weeds are. An expanded crop rotation, and rotating appropriate chemistry will be more effective than tillage in reducing herbicide resistance in weed populations.
--The ultimate goal will be removing synthetics from crop production.As time passes this will happen because of weed resistance, environmental regulation, or cost.These pressures will force us to learn to incorporate cover crops, do inter-seeding, and use companion crops in our production of cash crops.
--Disciplines within soil & crop sciences need a closer relationship.Weed scientists need to look for solutions through microbiologists, crop specialists, and other related disciplines.Books like “When Weeds Talk” by Jay L. McCaman have a lot of potential for weed management, by manipulating soil chemistry and biology through plant cultivars.Research by crop specialists working with cover crop cultivars, intercropping, and companion cropping are showing some real promise in increasing yields and reducing weed competition and diseases in cash crops.Cropping problems need to be approached through coordinated discussion and research by cooperating disciplines instead of individual disciplines reverting back to old failed practices.
These pics are examples of WW crops from two different tillage systems. Both of these crops look pretty good as of April 13th, 2021.
<----- Pic on the left is an example of 2021 WW on long term conventional ground. This crop was seeded on chemical fallow grnd.
<---- Pic on the left is an example of 2021 WW on ULD grnd. This area was seeded too shallow and got a late start.
This winter/spring I had a unique opportunity to run a lab test on two soils that have very different history. One soil has ~30 years of no-till, with the last eight years being ultra-low disturbance no-till. The other field, a couple hundreds yards away has a history of one hundred plus years of conventional tillage/cropping, with no no-till history. Both locations were fairly level with low erosion from weather, although a difference in tillage erosion would be apparent. The no-till field has a large amount (mat) of residue, and the tilled field has a small amount (a lot of open ground) of residue. I had high expectations of seeing a dramatic difference in OM, EC, BD, Respiration, and some differences of several macro and micro nutrients. WHAT A DISAPPOINTMENT!! Some numbers were the same, and some showed slight differences, but all in all, no revelations. This lab is not the general run of the mill type that we are all accustomed to. I have used this lab for a couple of years for different projects.
Physically there is a world of difference between these two fields. April 13th with no measurable rain since March 23rd the ULD grnd was soft to walk across, where the tilled field was hard under foot. Sinking a 1"diameter soil probe into the ULD field was easy, down the full 4 ft length of the probe, where the conventionally tilled field was very difficult down to ~18", where resistance eased up (maybe even softer than the ULD field in the lower 2'.
Why didn't the lab show differences as expected? Two things come to mind. 1)- In my mind this was such a no brainer that I was careless taking the samples. My process of taking an undefined slice of soil using a narrow trenching shovel was bad technique. A lot of possible error could result. 2)- This supports my comments on earlier posts about lab testing, and difficulty in trying to show value of no-tilling through our long recognized lab protocols.
I'm convinced that no-till deals primarily with the physical component of soil health, but secondary to other processes like biological diversity and nutrient recycling. Biological activity has to be helped with cover crops and possibly reintroducing microbiological species through well prepared compost and compost teas. No-till is significant in improving soil drainage, and it reduces destruction of soil organisms community life. No-till is the first step required for us (in the Palouse) in developing a healthy soil. With few exceptions, our environment will not support tillage and develop a healthy soil. Comparing infiltration rate, wet aggregate stability (SLAKE test), visual soil structure, and earthworm count is easy to do and shows dramatically what no-till brings to the table relating to soil health. Bulk density should be an easy comparison, but the penetrometer is effected by moisture content, soil type and other factors that vary from point to point. So, what do I conclude? As many of my earlier posts mention, a no-tillage farming system, is very effective in building soil structure over time. A no-tillage farming system, when coupled with high surface residue (soil armor) is very effective in controlling erosion from tillage, water, and wind. A no-tillage farming system is helpful in slowing evaporation when coupled with a protective mat (soil armor) on the ground, and even more effective if also coupled with standing stubble. Moisture is lost principally through evaporation, not crop production. Keeping soil surface temperature down, and a low wind velocity along the soil surface, saves moisture that can be used by the crop. Another benefit to a no-tillage system and heavy mat of residue is reduced competition from weed species, either broadleaf or grasses. We see it consistently year after year when comparing our neighboring fields with either conventional tillage or high disturbance no-till. Unfortunately, we still have to apply herbicides like everyone else.
In recent years I have observed a number of no-till operations that do not look as if the operators understand that there are some basic fundamentals that need to be followed to be successful. I fear these operations will get into trouble, or revert back to their comfortable position with tillage. I recommend and encourage farmers to open the above link and learn from it.
This image of Dwayne Beck, a researcher at the Dakota Lakes Research Farm near Pierre, SD, is from a presentation he gave at a meeting sponsored by the SD NO-TILL ASSOCIATION, March 11, 2019. I have had the privilege of meeting with him and listening to several presentations over the years, starting in May of 1995 at the Dakota Lakes Research Farm. I would say that Dwayne is the GURU of gurus when it comes to no-till. Back in the early 1990s, he established the basic fundamentals for successfully no-tilling and the reasoning behind them. His interest and mine are the same, --manage water better. He needed to stop soil erosion in SD, and I needed to stop soil erosion on my operation. No-tilling was key to that goal. Unlike so much information available through media, his basic fundamentals on Sanitation, Diversity, Intensity and Competition to successfully no-till works anywhere on the globe. My first trip (1995) to the research station was prompted by complaints I had using Glyphosate for weed control. My second trip was prompted by complaints I had about applying his fundamentals to my operation. The take-home message from that trip was his statement to me, "I earned my Ph.D. developing those fundamentals, now, you will earn your Ph.D. learning how to apply those fundamentals on your farm". He was so right! I knew back then that everything about farming is site-specific, but didn't think about it in this context. Soils, microclimates, topography vary across the land. I was trying to clone his Pierre SD practices for St. John WA, and that didn't work. When I adapted my practices to fit the FUNDAMENTALS, no-tilling did work. We learn our trade and tend to get stuck in our ways instead of adapting to changing conditions. Climate change and an increasing population with its political fall out are major challenges for farming, and will be more so in the future. As we move forward to a goal of sustainable production and more nutrient-dense foods with reduced commercial inputs we will have to follow "improved" fundamentals. Unfortunately, I don't know how to interpret "improved fundamentals" at this time, but I do have a blurred direction to follow.
RUSLE2 is used by USDA to evaluate a farm operation for various programs offered by the USDA. It also can be used by individuals to evaluate practices for the purpose of improving soil health. Following, is the link to this 1:03:34 presentation explaining the variables that make up RUSLE2. [ RUSLE2 explained ] This is a very good and thorough understandable explanation of what goes into the evaluation. It's a much better tool than I ever thought. I knew that it was under constant research to improve its accuracy.
This post relates to an earlier post [TILLAGE VS NO TILLAGE 3/2/20]. I had a very rare opportunity to compare crop response between using the rod weeder and not using the rod weeder. In the pic to the left, everything is the same except seeding date and use of the rod weeder. The yellowish tint (background) is the result of the crop roots growing in a low oxygen environment created by the the rod weeder. The crop in the foreground did not have a rod weeder used prior to seeding. The rod weeder, a regularly used tool with conventional tillage systems, creates a compaction layer where the bar presses and smears the soil it comes in contact with under the bar, while at the same time fluffs and loosens the soil that goes over the bar. Compaction layers slow the movement of water into (through) the soil profile which can, and in this case, did, cause the moisture content to remain above the field capacity for a significant amount of time. This excess moisture replaces oxygen in pore spaces and leads to an anaerobic condition. An Anaerobic soil condition increase growth of organisms normally associated with decreased plant health. Aerobic soils increase growth of organisms normally associated with promoting plant health.
[Feb. 10th pic] This pic (from the yellowish field) shows a very wet root ball. I could not remove the dirt for a decent pic of the root structure. The roots were bunched with few roots extending deeper into the profile. If you enlarge this pic, and compare with the one below, you can detect more yellowing of the plant leaves associated with oxygen deprivation compared to the pic below.
How this condition will effect overall yield compared to the crop in the pic below will be hard to assess because of so many variables inherent with two different operations and the weather from now to harvest. An example, --two recent events of very cold nights, one on April 13th @ 10ºF and the other April 17th @ 19ºF, and since then, many mornings with temps in the mid to upper 20's. When scouting on April 14th, the crop in the pic above was not jointing, while the crop in the pic below was jointing. The seed head associated with jointing could be vulnerable to freeze damage. During these events, the younger crop was showing serious leaf damage with color change and laying flat to the ground, while the older crop showed no leaf damage. Symptoms of cold damage in the area were reported as related to cultivar type, and plant size.
[Feb. 10th pic] This plant shown on the left is from the crop in the foreground of the pic at the top (dark green). The roots are quite damp but I was able to knock the dirt ball loose, exposing the root structure. The roots extended deep into the profile with no root mass near the crown of the plant. It was obvious the moisture was draining more quickly into the profile.
There is one more point related to water infiltration that I want to make, --that is, comparing the conventional fallow based system (the three pic's above), too a bordering field with a long history of direct seeding shown in the pic below.
[Feb. 10th pic]
The pic on the left shows winter wheat growing in a long term ultra-low disturbance direct seed field with surface armor well above the 100% NRCS residue chart. Notice how much dryer the roots look in this pic compared to either pic above. The wet dirt was easily removed, leaving much of the root system intact. The roots are growing and elongating very well.
This post brings up another subject, --fall tillering compared to spring tillering. I'll address that subject in another post.
We have recently taken on some land with conventional fallow to seed this fall. We have not dealt with conventional fallow for 25 years, and are no longer equipped for that condition. This field has well over a 100 year history of tillage. In our area, do to the geological history, that includes the Great Missoula Floods, most fields have several soil types. [ Missoula Floods is a 3:50 minute animated video showing some history of our Palouse Hill landscape. ] By the time fall seeding takes place, a cultivated field has had several tillage operations, and it's usual to have areas that powder and flow down slope in front of an implement. It's hard to hold seed at the desired depth in that situation. The pic shows a raindrop impacting bare soil. When rain falls, soils on cultivated fields tend to seal up due to poor structure left by impacting raindrops and tillage. With these conditions, the most successful tillage systems I have observed, are those that reduce the number of tillage passes to reduce aggravating powder development, and for the last pass prior to seeding, use a spiral packer to firm up the ground for the drill opener gauge wheel.
A decision had to be made on how to get this cultivated fallow field seeded. Rather then take the time to round up equipment to prepare this field for conventional seeding practice, Kye decided to take his chances with our heavy no-till CrossSlot drill, follow it with a tine harrow, and hope for the best, --expecting to do some reseeding later. Conditions allowed the crop to emerge and reseeding was unnecessary. Sometimes it's better to be lucky than good.
Some fields, or areas within fields, may require 3-5 years of no tillage to stop the seal over effect of the soil left from years of intense cultivation. We hope with our no-till experience, we can shorten that time frame without giving our landlord a hemorrhage.
When we started no-tilling there were problems that needed to be worked out. In our early no-till years there was no path for success developed through many years of experience, as there was with the conventional tillage system. That is behind us now, and transition can be shortened by years.
Now, --what do I see as significant between the two systems (tillage - no tillage) that exist side by side sharing a 3/4 mile long border, in our Palouse Hills region. We have had only a few months to deal with the cultivated ground but a few things have stood out.
---The no-till fallow ground is firm with good armor and operations create little or no dust. There was no dust coming off the field during windy conditions.
---The tilled fallow ground has deep (2-4") soft dirt with no armor and it was very dusty from any operation performed. The exposed surface did produce dust from wind when it blew before the surface sealed.
---This mild winter, allowed us to walk all over our no-tilled field without sinking. With care, I seldom got mud up the side of my boots. That was not the case with the tilled/winter wheat field. Walking in that field always left your boots a mess and you left deep tracks where you walked.
---The no-till fallow/winter wheat ground did not seal the surface when rainfall occurs.
---The tilled fallow/winter wheat ground sealed over immediately from light rainfall. Fortunately most of the winter wheat had emerged by the time measurable rain events arrived, and what wasn't emerged, was very shallow and able to push through the thin weak crust that formed on the soil surface.
---In early February, when scouting the fields, as I walked down our steep (20-40% slopes), there was no noticeable increased squishiness in the no-till fields. Our no-till fields have a very high infiltration rate and no tillage pan to restrict water movement through the upper profile. There was noticeable squishiness as I progressed down the slope in the conventional fallow/winter wheat field. This condition is when water moves slowly under the surface, on or near the restricting tillage transition zone from high to low elevations. Surface erosion was expected, but did not show in the conventional tilled field.
There is much that I could say to support no-tilling over tillage; however, this post is to utilize the rare opportunity to compare side by side effects between no tillage and tillage as we experienced them.
I have been skeptical about man being able to influence the climate, but I have become a believer. Increasing atmospheric CO2 and NO3 levels are just a part of what I see as being influenced by man. Desertification appears to me to be a bigger problem, and we, in the worldwide agricultural community, are a major part of the problem, -- along with the spatial needs generated by 7.9 billion people. (In my lifetime world population has more than tripled from 2.2b)
The earth's climate is dynamic, changing continually. Natural cycles resulting from the earth's tilt, relationship to other planets, their orbits, and earth's position to the all important sun and our moon, have powerful influence on the earth's climate. Thirty years of lecturing by Dr. Art Douglas has left no doubt in my mind on the importance of these cycles.
Our use of fossil fuels probably is contributing to CO2 buildup that so many are claiming to be the major cause of climate change. It's the goto energy source for 7.9b people with an infrastructure that gradually developed over more than a 100 years, and we probably ought to change, --but to what? I hope I'm wrong but it seems that we have taken a hiatus on working out the problems with fusion reaction, and fission waste disposal is a nasty issue. I view wind power as nothing more than a scam, a money pit that has fleeced the public. It is horribly inefficient, extremely high maintenance, and a low life expectancy (It was recently reported that 20yrs is current expectation, down from the original 50yrs), and the eventual removal of these dinosaurs will be equally expensive as when they were installed. Solar Energy holds a lot of potential. It is something that can be built into building construction, and not rely total on huge solar farms. There is also geothermal, wave action, hydrogen fuel cell technology that can be improved and brought into the mix, and, who knows what new technologies the future will hold.
Recently, all the information I access that relates to soil health makes reference to "taking cues from nature in developing farming practices", or "work with nature, not against it". In my striving to learn about soil health I ran across a presentation that was intriguing. It gave a pretty impressive picture and narrative on global desertification and it's implication. DESERTIFICATION by Allen Savory. The pic in this post is from that presentation. Notice the light colored areas contrasted with the green areas. The light colored areas are associated with "desertification". The more I watch this video the more connected I become with the message. The reasoning behind our operations move to a ULD farming system is incorporated in Allen Savory's message, but he goes farther. Being a grain producer, I'm resisting the introduction of livestock into our operation; however, I understand the reasoning, their potential, and it's possible they will show up on our operation sometime in the future.
My statement above, about agriculture worldwide being part of the problem stems from the fact that in any given year we leave a lot of ground in a nonproductive state that is radiating energy instead of capturing energy and converting it through photosynthesis to a crop. Our practice of fallowing is an example of a poor land management practice. The global increase of wild fires, along with the ever increasing number of people and their related spacial needs, are factors that influence desertification. These man caused influences are gradually changing air currents related to high and low air cells across the globe, concentrating energy. This concentrated energy is effecting the strength and location of storms. Each of us, with our relatively small farming operation think that we are insignificant, so, what we do will not have any effect on the climate. I'm beginning to realize that the mismanagement of our tiny amount of global resource combined with millions of other independent operations doing the same thing adds up to be a huge potential impact. We need to rethink our attitude on how we manage our land so as to make a positive contribution to sequestering carbon, and reducing practices that promote desertification!!
This is an article that I copied and pasted to this post from an online source of the Successful Farming magazine. The link is as follows: Is Tillage Stealing Soil. This is damning research done and reported on fields that aren't nearly as vulnerable as the Palouse Hills. I don't think that farmers really appreciate the damage they do with tillage. It's just something we do, it has been done for generations, and many are not interested in changing. I'm convinced we can stop eroding our fields and can actually rebuild the productivity of our soils. We just have to break with tradition and learn to farm using new technology and ideas.
_____________________________________________
IS TILLAGE STEALING YOUR SOIL?
TILLAGE IS A STEALTHY ERODER THAT ROBS YOUR PRECIOUS TOPSOIL. HERE’S HOW TO FIX IT.
In 2014, Jodi DeJong- Hughes prepared a field day exhibit with other University of Minnesota (U of M) researchers.
“We created a soil with alternating layers of sand and clay through which we ran a disk ripper,” recalls the U of M Extension soil scientist.
As the disk ripper steamed through the soil, something caught their eye, akin to a shiny penny at the bottom of a swimming pool.
“We could see the soil moving 8 to 10 feet in front of the disk ripper,” she says. “I knew the disk ripper moved soil, but I didn’t think it moved it that far.”
On the surface, that short distance seems insignificant. Yet, soil movement keyed by hundreds of tillage trips year after year adds up. Erosion by tillage takes on a disturbing tone in areas with glaciated hilly landscapes.
“Over time, severe soil losses result from soil moving off hilltops to lower ground through tillage,” says David Lobb, a University of Manitoba soil scientist.
Soil erosion often conjures up visions of blinding dust storms or soil mired in tar-like gullies. Yet, soil loss keyed by tillage can dwarf those of wind and water erosion. A 1994 erosion analysis by Lobb and other researchers in southwestern Ontario found tillage erosion accounted for at least 70% of total soil loss.
‘‘More soil is moved by tillage erosion than by wind and water erosion combined,’’ says Jodi DeJong-Hughes.
STEALTHY ERODER
Tillage erosion surfaced long before the moldboard plow was just a gleam in the eye of John Deere. When man first tilled with a hoe, soil moved.
“The soil was always pulled downslope, never upslope,” says Lobb.
Over time, tillage – whether by hoe or machine – strips topsoil away, particularly on sloping land. Ever notice those yellow to white hues on hilltops before crops mask them? This indicates tillage that has stripped an elevated area right down to the subsoil.
Tillage erosion can even impact the pancake-flat ground of the Red River Valley of North Dakota and Minnesota.
“Even on so-called flat land, tillage will fill surface drains in the field with soil,” says Lobb. “Google Earth or aerial images can show diagonal ridges in those fields where soil has been moved by tillage.”
Soil losses incurred by tillage erosion can be staggering. DeJong-Hughes cites a 2002-2006 USDA-ARS study at Morris, Minnesota, where a moldboard plow tilled highly erodible land (HEL) slopes.
In 2003, the tillage erosion loss of 27 tons per acre per year was nearly 5½ times as much as the natural 5 tons per acre loss per year. Tillage erosion can then trigger wind and water erosion.
“Once tillage occurs, wind and rain can move the soil as it becomes detached,” says Dave White, who served as NRCS chief from 2009 to 2013. This negatively affects both flat and hilly land.
That’s what happened in the USDA-ARS study.
“When water in the gully area (of the field) moved in, erosion increased another 9 tons per acre,” says DeJong-Hughes. “So, 36 tons per acre of soil per year were moved. In these areas, we were getting 45-bushel-per-acre wheat. The farmer was basically farming the subsoil. The phosphorus, potassium, and organic matter in those eroded areas also decreased.”
One perk surfaced. “On low-lying areas, 90 bushels per acre wheat was harvested,” she says.
Increased yields on lower areas don’t always result, though. On a typical slope, tillage erosion can deposit topsoil up to a meter deep, Lobb says.
“The crop often can’t benefit from that,” he says. It just can’t use that much topsoil.”
NO QUICK FIX
Granted, moldboard plowing HEL soils these days is akin to robbing a bank. Conservation tillage is now seen as the panacea to all that ails soil. Some conservation tillage tools, though, worsen erosion. Chisel plowing at high speeds can move more soil than moldboard plowing, says Lobb.
“It’s like taking a road grader over the field,” he says.
No-till works better. Just don’t expect it to work miracles on high eroded areas.
“Just stopping tillage will not change the situation,” says Lobb. “It just stops it from getting worse.”
Despite its name, no-till uses some tillage to clear a seed path.
High-disturbance openers, such as hoes and sweeps and injection units, key tillage that leaves at least 50% of the soil surface exposed to subsequent wind and water erosion, says Lobb.
“With high-disturbance seeding, we still scrape off topsoil,” says Lobb. He notes some early Canadian no-tillers were surprised that higher yields didn’t result on these areas.
“Improving yields on eroded hilltops means rebuilding the soil,” says Lobb. “There was no biological capacity in those areas to build up the soil with more organic matter. The topsoil was scraped off.”
WHAT TO DO?
Farmers still have to farm using some form of tillage, whether it’s conventional tillage or the slight tillage incurred under no-till.
Still, chin up. The following steps can minimize tillage erosion. In the case of tools like cover crops, farmers may even begin to rebuild tillage-eroded areas.
Study yield monitors and maps. Yield monitors and maps can pinpoint where tillage erosion occurs. “If you see the same (lower) yield pattern year after year on those areas, they can help you determine if tillage erosion is the problem,” says Lobb.
Slow down. Quicksilver planting and tillage rapidly speeds fieldwork, but they trigger tillage erosion. ‘‘Going up and down hilltops at particularly high speeds, such as 10 to 15 mph, will devastate landscapes,’’ says Lobb.
Steady your speed. “When you see great variation of field speeds, massive soil losses can result,” says Lobb. That’s easier said than done on rolling ground. Tilling or planting uphill slows implement speed. Meanwhile, tilling or planting downhill boosts it. “You’re always going to move more soil going downhill,” Lobb says. Compounding this is the fact that power ratings for tillage implements are often evaluated on flat ground, Lobb says. In the real world of rolling ground, ratings run askew, he says. Technology helps. GPS tools can help pinpoint varying speeds. “You can see if you are creating problems when moving up and down field dips,” Lobb says. Farmers can use this real-time data to better maintain a steady speed, he adds.
Vary tillage depth. That’s the premise behind John Deere’s TruSet Tillage technology. TruSet draws data from field and yield maps to create a tillage prescription that automatically adjusts tillage depth. TruSet can automatically adjust for less intense tillage on slopes and deeper tillage on heavier soils and high-residue areas, says Jarred Karnei, John Deere product marketing manager.
TruSet fits eight of Deere’s units that till soil via ripping, field cultivating, mulch finishing, disking, vertical tilling, and nutrient applying.
Move residue, not soil. Although no-till can’t restore or fix topsoil-devoid areas, it can preserve existing topsoil. No-till using double-disk openers combined with trash whippers works best, says Lobb. Pay special attention to row cleaner settings, says Steve Berger, a Wellman, Iowa, farmer. “When running row cleaners, move the residue and not the soil,” he says. “A lot of erosion occurs from not correctly setting row cleaners.”
Rebuild the soil. “After you stop stirring up the soil through tillage, grow cover crops to increase organic matter,” says Berger. He started dabbling with no-till and cover crops back in the 1970s. “With no-till and cover crops, I have a whole new environment underneath the soil,” he says. This approach has spurred hyphae (hair-like projections) of arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi in soil and roots to produce a sticky substance called glomalin. High glomalin concentrations help stabilize soil aggregates and boost soil structure. This helps soils better function to grow crops, says Berger.
DON’T GIVE UP
Mother Nature took centuries to build topsoil. It won’t come back overnight. Recognizing that tillage erosion occurs is the first step to reclaiming soil.
“If you do things right, the soil can bounce back,” says DeJong-Hughes.
RESTORING LANDSCAPES
Chinese farmers historically managed tillage erosion in moving soil from low areas to higher ones by bucket brigade.
North American farmers can use the same concept. “Just like in China, this entails moving soil up from the bottom to the top,” says David Lobb, a University of Manitoba soil scientist. “This just does it mechanically.”
Soil landscape restoration uses road construction scrapers to move topsoil at the bottom of slopes to top slopes and hilltops. In many cases, a $5,000 to $10,000 scraper pulled behind a field tractor does the job, says Lobb.
MOVING ON UP
Ivan and Brian DeJong, two brothers who own Youngfield Farms Ltd. near Nestleton in southern Ontario, were first tipped off to declining yields on sidehills by combine yield monitors. Readings indicated yields on sidehills eroded by tillage were 50% that of the average field yield.
So, using a scraper hooked to a tractor, they moved 2 to 3 inches of topsoil at the bottom of hills to the sidehills. Yield average on mitigated slopes zoomed from 60% of field average to 90% of field averages after four years on their wheat, corn, and soybeans.
“We are so convinced that it works, we plan to use this method whenever we pick up new farms,” says Ivan DeJong.
The DeJongs typically move soil following wheat harvest in early August. “That is a time when it is normally drier and we do less (compaction) damage,” he says.
Risk exists. “Heavy rains can wash the soil back down the hill,” says DeJong. The brothers reduce this risk by nurturing a cover crop of volunteer wheat, tillage radishes, and Austrian winter peas.
The DeJongs’ experience concurs with findings Lobb and other soil scientists have made. A 2004 to 2006 large-scale field study in rolling fields in southwestern Manitoba compared four fields in which soil restoration was compared with control areas. Tillage-eroded sidehills to which 4 inches of bottom-lying topsoil were added had:
Quicker crop emergence.
Greater plant populations – 60% greater.
Larger yields ranging from a 31% increase the first year to 64% the next in one primary site.
In three secondary sites, yield increase ranged from 10% to 133% compared with control plots.
Decreased yields in areas where topsoil is removed is a risk. In the Manitoba study, though, this occurred in just one of three sites where this was monitored. Overall, field yield averages were higher in renovated sites than controlled ones, says Lobb.
“It is one of the most cost-effective land management practices we have,” says Lobb.
I recently attended the WSU Wheat University. They had a diverse agenda of subject matter, with presentations from researchers at Washington State University, Oregon State University, and University of Idaho. Concurrent classes were going, and I didn't get to all the presentations. From those that I did attend there were several things that I found important, hence, chronicle here. Water Movement:--Soil type effects rate of moisture infiltration, shown by a demonstration using Walla Walla and Ritzville soil types. --Soil particles are quickly transported by surface water and block passages into the soil profile, sealing the surface. Runoff begins at that point. No-till fields have more channels into the soil profile than cultivated fields and usually more surface residue. --Surface residue retards water flowing across the soil surface. The more residue the better. Even though some moisture is trapped and evaporated from the residue, more residue translates to more moisture in the profile. --The demo. in the pic above, shows a Ritzville soil with two containers of soils from a cultivated field. One container had surface residue, the other did not. The third container of Ritzville soil is from a no-till field. The no-till container had no water loss from the simulated rain event. The cultivated containers both had water loss but the container with residue had less loss and notably less soil loss. --Water is held under tension until a path or condition breaks the tension. Water is attracted to surfaces, going down the sides of channels into the soil profile.
Nutrients in straw:--A ton of wheat straw ranges from $10-$19 in nutrient value. Straw nutrients vary depending on nutrient level found in the soil plus the amount applied, and the value placed on the various nutrients. --Rough estimate for straw residue is 100# per bushel of grain. --Swath and bale removes approximately 50% of the residue. Feeding baler directly from combine increases the loss of leaves and chaff raising the total loss a couple of percentage points. (A 100bu/ac yield translates to ~$25 to $47 per acre loss of nutrients). --When a field is burned, you lose nearly all the C-N-S, and less of the remaining elements if the ash has not blown away. --K & P can be washed out of the residue from rainfall or irrigation. Crop Insects: --Wire worms: come in three species (Great Basin - Western - Sugar beet). --The are identified by the shape of the little pincer type protrusion on their tail. --The Western feeds actively in April & May. --Sugar beet variety feeds later in the season. --You may not encounter the Great Basin variety at economic levels. --Seed treatment works pretty good on the Western. --Check edges of bare areas for dead and dying new leaves on cereal plants, then dig around plant crowns. --Wire worms prefer spring wheat over winter wheat. It is probably a worm life cycle issue. --They are found mostly in bottom land and may not need treating on hills. --Wire worms are attracted to cereal grains, with the exception of oats. --They have little attraction to Pulses, Brassica's, or chemical fallow. --Wireworms may feed in chem fallow fields but they will not lay eggs. --Proximity to CRP fields will likely increase wireworm pressure. --≥ 45ºF worms will be active. --Hession Fly:The female population is what does the damage. She lays the eggs in the stem. --The fly does not move far. --The fly overwinters in grain (not oat) residue. --Cereal plant resistance to Hession Fly is declining. We need to pay attention to cultural practices like expanding crop rotation to help keep losses from this fly to a minimum. --Weevils: Pea Weevil (not a true weevil because it has no elbow in it's antenna), Pea Leaf Weevil, Cabbage Seedpod Weevil are the three main types that cause economic damage in peas and canola. The pea weevil scallops the lower leaves weakening the plant making it more susceptible to aphid attack. These don't seem to be as prevalent as the pea leaf weevil. The cabbage seedpod weevil lays eggs in the pea and canola seedpods. In canola the pods become misshapen when attacked. --Aphid: They tend to attack weakened plants/stands due to nutrition deficiencies or weevil attack. --Scout field edges for infestations. It's possible you will only have to treat the border which will minimize damage to beneficial insects. --When possible spray late in the day to minimize impact on beneficial insects (specifically bees).
For Soil Sustainability - every agricultural operation needs
continual upgrading of it's conservation ethic, and it's increasingly easier to do with the internet providing access to the research being done. As I look back, my life has spanned nearly the entire period of "modern" agriculture, --since tractors replaced horses. In the early 1930's, my grandfather traded twelve Percheron horses for a 20hp, gas fueled, steel track, Allis Chalmers Model M tractor (I have one stored in the barn). 1942, the farming community started learning to farm out of a "jug" (2-4D was first marketed). Holistic farming practices, what there was, were abandoned. I have a newspaper article where my grandfather was interviewed, stating that when he first started farming he could raise forty bushels to the acre of winter wheat every year, but now (early 1940's), he had to incorporate a fallow year to get 40 bushels on his winter wheat. In retrospect, what can be read into his statement was this: In 30-40 years, farming practices had destroyed the native soils natural ability to annually grow 40bu/ac of winter wheat. Tillage along with associated erosion was destroying the organic matter, reducing the ability of the soil to hold water, and provide nutrients for the crop. This destructive process is continuing today on most farming operations. Today, it's reported, depending on the location, that 40% - 60% of the natural productivity of our soils have been lost.
From the time the sod was plowed under at the turn of the 20th century, through the mid 1960's there was tremendous erosion. Regularly there was deep snow on frozen ground that resulted in spring runoffs that cut many and deep ditches in fields of winter wheat, along with intense summer storms compounding the problem. From the 60's to the mid 80's snow decreased, the ground didn't freeze as deep, summer storms became less, and in 1984 we were declared a drought region. Around 2006 it looked like we may be seeing a swing back to more snow, and summer storm activity but now I question that observation. Climate is dynamic, and change was obviously taking place, then, as now.
Today, many farm operations are still following the farming practices of our grandfathers and fathers. The difference I see is today tractors have more horsepower, and tillage equipment is bigger and heavier. A 500-600 horsepower tractor can pull equipment faster and deeper. In the Palouse it has long been common practice to comb the field to smooth the roughness left by primary tillage operations. These operations have loosened and floated most , or all, the organic matter off narrow ridges and redeposited it on the lower slopes.
I credit the publics demand for clean water and the interest in organic food for the research being done that can only be termed more "holistic". The federal and state governments are throwing a lot of money at the problem of water pollution. In the last two decades research has been steadily ramping up on all disciplines associated with soil health which included the reintroduction of cover crops.
In my college days if someone would have said "plants communicate with one another" they would have been dismissed as looney. Today we know this to be a credible statement, along with knowledge that organisms in the soil biota mine nutrients from solid rock, plants can redistribute nutrients through the soil profile, influence soil pH, mycorrhiza fungi transport water and nutrients between supportive plant species, and every plant type manufactures a different root exudate.
There is tremendous amount of new information on issues relating to soil health, and it is coming at an every increasing pace. We as Stewards of the land need to learn and apply this knowledge.
Left pic: --one pass low disturbance Right pic: --a good no-till drill in tillage drill in undisturbed field. prepped field. For many years I have heard farmers express a willingness to include a "no-till" practice within a tillage system. It blows my mind every time I hear it, --these are two completely different (maybe polar opposite) systems. To me it's like mixing oil and water, --a mess.
Advantages:
--The potential for soil erosion from water, wind and tillage is significantly reduced during the period that the soil is not tilled. Un-tilled soil allows old root systems to remain intact along with the surface residue. These elements resist erosion. Any tillage that follows negates this advantage. As years of no-till add up, and as you move from high disturbance to low disturbance no-till, the advantage of no-till increases, --meaning: as time passes and you gain knowledge on soil biology and apply that knowledge, your soils will gain health and productivity instead of continuing to degrade under a tillage system.
Disadvantages:
--You may expand the number of weed species in your field. There is a weed shift with no-till. China Lettuce and Russian Thistle can be problem weeds in chem-fallow. Every plant type has a preferred environment. Changing that environment by introducing no-till, or diversifying crops, or even reducing the number of tillage passes will change weed types and populations. Those of us experienced in no-till use that fact and exploit it in our management of the system.
--You will probably need additional N. If you take soil samples and use an N budget, it will include a factor for N production that relates to the percent of OM in the sample. Tillage stokes the furnace; making N, by mixing oxygen (air) with fuel (OM) and soil temperature to break down the OM. Without tillage this process is slowed way down by not introducing oxygen (air) into the soil profile, creating less N from the soil source. It varies, but somewhere around 3-7 years of continued no-till, N release becomes similar to tilled soil. When you start building your soil OM, than you can start reducing your commercial applied N, and other plant nutrients.
THE BOTTOM LINE:
When you finally quit making excuses and admit to yourself that the productivity of the land you are stewarding is being flushed down the creek and/or blowing away and decide to change, --CHANGE!!!
Start slowly, --take a field that is large enough to bring in a custom no-tiller to do your seeding, dedicate the field to no-till, and learn the system. Expand across the remainder of your operation as soon as you get some comfort level with the system. Don't make comparisons with your tilled fields. These comparisons only slow down the process of positive change. It is a proven fact that tillage destroys soil productivity, and unless you change, your soil will become dirt, and unproductive. It's just a matter of time. In a little over a 100 years we have lost ~50% of our soils natural productivity. Evidence of this happening sticks out all over the Palouse Hills region by observing the skimpy/no crop on some ridge lines. Change has never been easier than it is now. Most no-till issues have been experienced and solutions found, --meaning: no-tillers are experiencing fewer problems as their experience and knowledge increases. Most experienced no-tillers I have been around are quite willing to talk about their experiences and help others.
FUTURE:
No-till controls the bleeding by stopping erosion through protecting the soil surface and building back soil structure. You can accelerate building soil productivity by increasing soil biology, --a subject beyond this post.
